TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 1490
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the course of hearing of the appeal." 2. The relevant facts as borne out from the record are that the assessee in the year under consideration declared a total loss of Rs. 11,03,49,616/- on 30.09.2008. The assessee revised the said return on 04.05.2009 declaring a loss of Rs. 1,09,60,211/-. During the scrutiny proceedings, the assessee was required to furnish reasons for revising the return. Considering the same, the AO observed that in the revised return the assessee though has voluntarily disallowed certain expenses claimed in the return of income filed on 30.09.2008 however, at the same time new expenses to the extent of Rs. 63,89,741/- had been claimed. Referring to the profit and loss account and balance sheet filed alongwith the return it was observed that these expenses had been considered as Capital Work in progress and had not been charged as expenses. The assessee accordingly was required to submit an explanation for allowability of these expenses. The assessee explained that these expenses were incurred for maintaining its corporate structure, existence and preserving the assets-infrastructure. It was explained that the assessee had maintained all licenses etc for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessing Officer in the order dated 31.12.2008 for the proceedings u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3) as reproduced below: - "As extracted above, the assessee has furnished head-wise details of the revenue expenses claimed by it against the only main receipt of interest on income tax refund. I have gone through the said contentions and explanations. As found earlier, these claims are made by the assessee at a time when the entire business empire has tumbled down long back and no activity except various litigations as mentioned, have been going on. With the change in the control of the affairs now, the question that remains unexplained is whether he change over was business of the assessee in its old garb of management or whether the spoils of the past has anything to do with the futuristic adventures of the new controlling segment. The essential feature that the expenses should not only be incidental or necessary, but it should be "wholly, and exclusively" for the purpose of business, has not been satisfactorily brought out by the assessee after having spent so many words as quoted above. Therefore, only the following expenses are allowed:- Auditors remuneration of Rs. 11,000/-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ain the day-to-day accounts, records and books of the appellant, salary to an office boy who is required to do all menial work and errands relating to the company - even depositing the said government dues, water and electricity that are essential for preserving and maintaining the hotel property owned by the appellant company are also bare minimum expenses required for maintaining the company and its assets. It was held in Birla Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. vs. CIT [64 ITR 568, 584 (Cal.)] that business includes day-to- day running of the business, preservation of business and protection of its assets and property from expropriation, coercive process or hostile title, payment of statutory dues and taxes and things incidental to carrying on business and expenses relating thereto were allowable business expenses. This ruling was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court [82 ITR 166]. I am also of the view that expenses on security, electricity and water are outright consumables and cannot be capitalized as these expenses do not add any value to the capital asset. Moreover, the loss returned by the appellant was reduced from Rs. 8,60,18,830/- filed in the original return to R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aced upon Shingar Lamps Ltd. vs ACIT [2006] 150 taxman 17 (ASR) (MAG.); K.N.P. Securities P.Ltd. [2010] 1 ITR 130 (Mum.); CIT vs Anita Jain [2009] 182 taxman 173 (Del.); Urban Mass Transit Co.Ltd. vs ACIT [2013] 39 taxmann.com 121; CIT vs Rampur Timber Company Ltd. 129 ITR 58 (Allahabad); Nakodar Bus Services Pvt.Ltd. 179 ITR 506 (Pun.); Chennai & Co. Pvt.Ltd. vs CIT 206 ITR 616 (Bom.); Hindustan Chemicals Works Ltd. vs CIT 124 ITR 561; and Birla Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. vs CIT 64 ITR 568, 584 (Cal.). 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the same would show that before the Assessing Officer, the assessee vide its letter dated 15.11.2010 has submitted that the expenditure incurred is for maintaining its corporate structure in existence and preserving the assets/infrastructure. The said explanation has been extracted in para 2.2 of the assessment order. It has also been submitted that the assessee company has claimed that it has maintained all necessary licenses etc. required for the operation of a hotel. We pause here and find on going through the material available on record and considering the arguments of....